A critical review of local and world news. This blog originally commented on the Moncton Times and Transcript but has enlarged its scope.

Saturday, December 19, 2015

Dec.19: Hysteria and a drowning nation.

This is very late because the
Christmas season has come crashing down on me. It is 11 pm as a finish this.

It was many years
ago that the editor of a major, Canadian newspaper told me that the
Irving press was a disgrace to Canadian journalism. Over the years, I
met many journalists who shared that opinion. But it has become much
worse over the last several months. It looks as though it's being
done to some plan.

The only real story
in section A did, admittedly, make it to the first page – but it's
at the bottom of the page, and brief. Twin River Paper Co. was fined
320,000 dollars for polluting the river waters near Edmunston. Some
of it may have been sloppiness, but some, involving acids toxic to
fish, was 'wilful'.

That's it for news.

A4 has yet another
story that tells us nothing about the firing of Dr. Cleary. If the
editors and reporters would get off their rear ends, and ask
questions – there's an obvious one. The government said she did not
meet its requirements for the job. Okay. Obvious question that
doesn't offend any law---what are the requirements for the job?
Surely, it's not against the law to tell us that.

As well, it wouldn't
require a genius to do some checking on Roundup weed killer, the
stuff that's being sprayed all over this province. It contains
glysophate which is toxic and probably cancerous. At least, that's
what the World Health Organization says. But what do they know?

Another local matter
a reporter might look at is what plans does city council have to deal
with climate change? I know, of course, that the climate isn't
changing. But all the governments in the world agree that it is. And
so do virtually all the scientists in the world.

So far, city council has babbled about improving public transport to
cut down on the use of cars. Forget it. Moncton has not, in its whole
history been able to improve public transport. That's because this
city is designed for cars. It's way too spread out to make public
transport workable. And if we were to use public transport in this
age of climate change, it surely should not be diesel busses.

The editorial is so
obviously kissing the rear ends of the rich that it's embarassing,
and should be hidden from children. The Coalition of New Brunswick
Employers are opposed to any increase in our already low taxes on
them. And when they speak, says the editor with puckered lips,
“...people listen.” And there's more. There's an editorial
attack on 'big government' – which means any government that leaves
the people hanging while it gives favours to the rich. Yes, greater
freedom to let big business loose to rip us off is what we need.

Norbert puckers up
on the same theme. He adds, “Never mind the self-interested or
entitled among us.”

That means most of
us loafers, of course, because a boot-licker like Norbert would never
dare mention the real self-interested and entitled among us.

Brent Mazerolle has
nothing much to say, really. But at least his column this is a real
commentary.

Then there's yet
another guest column by a far, right-wing think tank that serves the
real privileged and entitled people of this province. This one
suggest that 'greens' are marxists – which only tells me the writer
doesn't know what a marxist is. And his main point is that capitalism
is the best way to control the environment. Significantly, he doesn't
give a single example of where capitalism has done this. Think of all
the environmental leadership we've been getting from the oil
industry. And, boy, JDIrvingLtd have been real leaders in saving our
environment by spraying us.

Jo-Anne Moore has good column. This, and the polluting paper company
on the first page are all that is worth reading in Section A.

Section B,
Canada&World, has nothing at all worth reading. Outside Canada,
there is a nothing story about Obama. Europe gets a nod with a
nothing story about how the EU will fight an 'uncompromising' war
against ISIS. Ever heard of leader who said he would fight a
compromising war? And there is not hint of the magnitude of the
refugee crisis in Europe and the middle east – and what that will
mean to the world. A whole page is devoted to really, really bad
poetry by MLAs. Another whole page (out of only six) of the usual
people holding up 'charity' cheques. Three of them are screaming ads
for 'Parlour Pawn'.

It is not possible for a newspaper to be so bad accidentally – or
even by stupidity. This one, especially lately, must be deliberately
designed to keep us in a stupor.

But, oh, I never,
ever thought I would say this. The Faith Page on A6 has a sermonette
that is good. It takes Christian principle into the real world –
which is what, I think, Jesus had in mind. As well, First United
Baptist Church is putting its money where its mouth is. It is
sponsoring a refugee family from The Congo – a real hell-hole
created by western capitalism.

This is what a faith page should be. And this is what a faith should
be.

In a similar story, Protestant and Catholic churches have worked out
an arrangement to help refugees land in Italy, a safer trip than the
voyage to Greece.

There was a great
deal in world news that the Irving press could and should have
reported. The U.S., for example, has lately been , to put it mildly,
provocative in flying its bombers routinely over waters in the South
China Sea claimed by China. And it is no coincidence that Japan is
now moving major units of its fleet into the general region. Britain
is readying to send 'boots' on the ground to fight ISIS in Libya. I
should have thought these things worth reporting.

There have been
strenuous efforts to involve the European Union in the middle east
wars and in Libya. Britain and France are enthusiastic because they
have to be. They are wilted empires that now have to ride on U.S.
coattails. Germany has joined them; but the rest of the EU has been
silent. And Italy has refused outright. This should raise a number of
questions.

1. Why does the U.S.
need so many large and powerful countries to defeat ISIS? Does the
U.S. really need them against ISIS? Or does it need them against
Russia?

2. If the U.S.
thinks ISIS is so terrible and has to be destroyed, why did it allow
ISIS for so long to transport its oil to market through Turkey?
Answer – the U.S. didn't want to destroy ISIS, not until it had
destroyed Syria. Putin destroyed that plan.

3. If the U.S.
wanted to get rid of Assad, why didn't it help the Syrian 'rebels' to
do it? Answer – they did help the Syrian 'rebels', directly and
through Saudi Arabia. But the 'rebels' never gained much support
among Syrians. In fact, a high proportion of them were not Syrians,
but hired mercenaries. And, since the Russians came on the scene, the
'rebels' have made themselves very scarce. As well, it's not at all
clear that the rebels are 'moderates' as our press routinely says.
It's quite possible that many, perhaps most, of them are closer to
ISIS in their thinking.

4. Have the U.S. and
Russia come to an agreement on Syrian elections after the defeat of
ISIS? Most of our news media say they have. But they haven't. They've
agreed there should be elections. But Russia wants Assad to be
eligible to run. The U.S. doesn't. The U.S. did not start this war to
bring democracy to Syria. It started the war to get Assad out of the
way so that US oil companies could control Syrian oil. Russia did not
join the war to bring democracy. It has exactly the same objectives
as U.S. oil companies – except they need Assad in power to do that.

Generally, the U.S. has opposed democracy wherever it raises its ugly
head. That what it has done in Latin America, in Egypt. That's what
it's doing with Erdogan in Turkey.

Another event that
really isn't producing much useful reporting is the contests for
leadership of the Democrat and Republican parties. We hear all the
idiocies and insults on the Republican side, and most of what we hear
is about the war against terrorism.

But the U.S. is a
country with social problems that could (and probably will) tear it
apart. And this is a race being fought out on pure fear and hysteria.
What would those candidates do about racism? About the startling rise
of poverty? About the decay of the education system? About a wage gap
that is the biggest in the developed world? About the rich who are
getting much richer while everybody else is getting poorer? About a
national debt that is so far out of control that it can never be
paid. The U.S. may well have to go to war with China simply to get
out of paying its debt to that country. What would they do about an
arms industry that is out of control in both civilian and military
sales, an industry that needs and wants as many wars as it can
create?

They're going to get
tough on ISIS? ISIS is the least of their problems. American police
kill more Americans in a year, far, far more than ISIS does. Armed
American civilians kill so many Americans that they make ISIS look
like amateurs.

I have never heard
of people running for a leadership on such a narrow platform. It's
ISIS, ISIS, ISIS, and Americans are buying it. They are getting no
sense whatever of the terror and slaughter and horror and misery that
the U.S. is inflicting on the world. They have no sense of how much
the world has come to hate and distrust the U.S., and the unlimited
greed of its wealthy. They have some, but little, sense of how
democracy and rights have vanished in the U.S. The country is now
ruled by big money. Nothing else. And they can vote for Trump or Bush
or Clinton. It makes no difference.

It's a country that
is either ignorant of or indifferent to the illegal acts of illegal wars carried out in over a hundred countries by drones, by the highly
trained murderers who are called special ops, and who kill friend or
foe, soldiers or civilians or babies with equal dedication. Again,
the scale of U.S. killing leaves that of ISIS in the dust.

Americans have been
doused in fear and hatred of a movement that was created in the first
place by the unlimited greed and brutality of the very wealthy –
the same very wealthy who already own all of the candidates but one.

That one is Bernie
Sanders who is running against Clinton for the Democrat leadership.
He has given some thought to social policy. He has a humane and moral
view of this world. But he isn't going to win the leadership.

He won't win because
the war industries and the oil industry aren't going to give him
campaign money. And he's not going to get help from the Democrat
hierarchy, because they, like Clinton, have long ago been bought off.

A long, long time
ago when I was just learning to swim, I nearly drowned. To this day,
I remember the feeling of panic vividly. I very much fear that is
what we are watching in the United States. It is a drowning nation.
And the panic is being manipulated by those very wealthy who own the
news media and the politicians, and whose greed has destroyed
whatever shreds of morality they might once have possessed and
whatever judgement they once possessed

No comments:

Post a Comment

Follow by Email

Loaded Web

About Me

born into poverty in Montreal. (1933 was a bad year to be born.) Kicked out of school in grade 11. Became factory hand, office boy.
Did a general BA, mostly at night at Sir George Williams University, and partly while a youth worker for YMCA, camps, etc. Then teacher training at McGill.
Taught gradea 7 to 11 for six years. Loved it.
Quit to do MA at Acadia, then PhD (History) at Queen's.
Taught history three years at UPEI, then some 35 years at Concordia U in Montreal.
Loved the teaching. Thought the profs had more pompous and useless asses among then than is really desirable outside a zoo.
work experience:
factory, office,social group work, office,camp director, teacher.
Radio - c. 3000 broadcasts, mostly current events.
TV - many hundred appearances, mostly commentaries.
Film - some writing, advising, voice-overs.
Writing - no count, some hundreds. Some academic, but mostly for popular market, and ranging from short stories to stories to newspaper and magazine columns to history books.
professional speaker - close to 2000.
Awards for the above? yep